9911796707
TMI Blog2018 (5) TMI 1185X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... d by them "under protest" vide TR-6 challans dated 10/02/2004, 21/02/204 and 03/03/204 in compliance of letters dated 09/02/2004 and 19/02/2004 issued by the Superintendent (Prev.), Central Excise, Kanpur. The refund was sought on the ground that the Department did not issue any show cause notice to the Appellant for demanding the duty even after the passage of a period of 4 years from the date of deposit, which shows that there was no case against the Appellant. The Appellant has claimed that the amount was deposited by the Appellant under protest which was prominently marked on the TR-6 Challans as "U/PROT". Therefore the provisions of Section 11B were not applicable in their case. 3. The Department denied the refund on the ground that t ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ly and not simply on the basis of mentioning the words "under protest" on duty paying documents. Accordingly, it was held that the Respondent - assessee is entitled to refund of the amount deposited holding the same as a „pre-deposit‟. As regards the interest it was observed that it is settled law and is evident from the relevant excerpts of the citations, quoted that in such cases interest is to be granted from the date of deposit till the date of actual refund. Accordingly, the Learned Commissioner (Appeals) directed to grant the interest to be paid from the date of deposit till the actual refund of the same. It was further directed that interest should be awarded at the rate of 6% per annum as provided under the statute. Reli ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ng the interest is not legal and proper and is set aside. The Appellant - assessee is entitled to get the interest as ordered vide Order-in-Appeal dated 13/01/2009. It was also observed that in the facts of the present case, it was not pre-deposit within the terms of Section 35F of the Act rather the Department had got the amount deposited during investigation, being out of pocket of the Appellant. But later on failed to establish the duty liability against the appellant and even failed to issue show cause notice. The amount was lying with the Department for more than 4 years without any reason and thus the assessee was entitled for compensation in the shape of interest which was granted to them by the Appellate order dated 13/01/2009. Also ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
